Inflationary spacetimes are not past-complete - Borde-Guth-Vilenkin - 2003
Excerpt: inflationary models require physics other than inflation to describe the past boundary of the inflating region of spacetime.
0110012" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0110012

"It is said that an argument is what convinces reasonable men and a proof is what it takes to convince even an unreasonable man. With the proof now in place, cosmologists can long longer hide behind the possibility of a past eternal universe. There is no escape, they have to face the problem of a cosmic beginning."
Alexander Vilenkin - Many Worlds In One - Pg. 176

"The conclusion is that past-eternal inflation is impossible without a beginning."
Alexander Vilenkin - from pg. 35 'New Proofs for the Existence of God' by Robert J. Spitzer (of note: A elegant thought experiment of a space traveler traveling to another galaxy, that Borde, Guth, and Vilenkin, used to illustrate the validity of the proof, is on pg. 35 of the book as well.)

How Atheists Take Alexander Vilenkin (& the BVG Theorem) Out Of Context - William Lane Craig - video
youtube.com/watch?v=Z79FGmh50Xo

"Every solution to the equations of general relativity guarantees the existence of a singular boundary for space and time in the past."
(Hawking, Penrose, Ellis) - 1970
9404/bigbang.html" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">leaderu.com/real/ri9404/bigbang.html

“All the evidence we have says that the universe had a beginning.” -
Cosmologist Alexander Vilenkin of Tufts University in Boston - January 2012
uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/vilenkins-verdict-all-the-evidence-we-have-says-that-the-universe-had-a-beginning/

Genesis 1:1-3
In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. The earth was without form, and void; and darkness was on the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters. Then God said, "Let there be light"; and there was light.

"The Big Bang represents an immensely powerful, yet carefully planned and controlled release of matter, energy, space and time. All this is accomplished within the strict confines of very carefully fine-tuned physical constants and laws. The power and care this explosion reveals exceeds human mental capacity by multiple orders of magnitude."
Prof. Henry F. Schaefer

One particular constant, the 'original phase-space volume' of the universe, required such precision that the "Creator’s aim must have been to an accuracy of 1 part in 10^10^123”. This number is gargantuan. If this number were written out in its entirety, 1 with 10^123 zeros to the right, it could not be written on a piece of paper the size of the entire visible universe, even if a number were written down on each sub-atomic particle in the entire universe, since the universe only has 10^80 sub-atomic particles in it.

Roger Penrose discusses initial entropy of the universe. - video
youtube.com/watch?v=WhGdVMBk6Zo

The Physics of the Small and Large: What is the Bridge Between Them? Roger Penrose
Excerpt: "The time-asymmetry is fundamentally connected to with the Second Law of Thermodynamics: indeed, the extraordinarily special nature (to a greater precision than about 1 in 10^10^123, in terms of phase-space volume) can be identified as the "source" of the Second Law (Entropy)."
2702/texts/Penrose.pdf" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">pul.it/irafs/CD%20IRAFS%2702/texts/Penrose.pdf

How special was the big bang? - Roger Penrose
Excerpt: This now tells us how precise the Creator's aim must have been: namely to an accuracy of one part in 10^10^123.
(from the Emperor’s New Mind, Penrose, pp 339-345 - 1989)

The Underlying Mathematical Foundation Of The Universe -Walter Bradley - video
4491491" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">metacafe.com/watch/4491491

Finely Tuned Gravity (1 in 10^40 tolerance; which is just one inch of tolerance allowed on a imaginary ruler stretching across the diameter of the entire universe) - video
7659795/" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">metacafe.com/w/7659795/

Fine Tuning Of Dark Energy (Cosmological Constant) and Mass of the Universe - Hugh Ross - video
4007682" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">metacafe.com/watch/4007682

Did the Universe Hyperinflate? – Hugh Ross – April 2010
Excerpt: Perfect geometric flatness is where the space-time surface of the universe exhibits zero curvature (see figure 3). Two meaningful measurements of the universe’s curvature parameter, ½k, exist. Analysis of the 5-year database from WMAP establishes that -0.0170 - ½k - 0.0068.4 Weak gravitational lensing of distant quasars by intervening galaxies places -0.031 - ½k - 0.009.5 Both measurements confirm the universe indeed manifests zero or very close to zero geometric curvature,,,
reasons.org/did-universe-hyperinflate

Anthropic Principle - God Created The Universe - Michael Strauss PhD. - video
4323661" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">metacafe.com/watch/4323661

“If we modify the value of one of the fundamental constants, something invariably goes wrong, leading to a universe that is inhospitable to life as we know it. When we adjust a second constant in an attempt to fix the problem(s), the result, generally, is to create three new problems for every one that we “solve.” The conditions in our universe really do seem to be uniquely suitable for life forms like ourselves, and perhaps even for any form of organic complexity."
Gribbin and Rees, “Cosmic Coincidences”, p. 269

One of cosmic (Rapid) inflation theory’s creators now questions own theory - April 2011
Excerpt: (Rapid) Inflation adds a whole bunch of really unlikely metaphysical assumptions — a new force field that has a never-before-observed particle called the “inflaton”, an expansion faster than the speed of light, an interaction with gravity waves which are themselves only inferred– just so that it can explain the unlikely contingency of a finely-tuned big bang.
But instead of these extra assumptions becoming more-and-more supported, the trend went the opposite direction, with more-and-more fine-tuning of the inflation assumptions until they look as fine-tuned as Big Bang theories. At some point, we have “begged the question”. Frankly, the moment we add an additional free variable, I think we have already begged the question. In a Bayesean comparison of theories, extra variables reduce the information content of the theory, (by the so-called Ockham factor), so these inflation theories are less, not more, explanatory than the theory they are supposed to replace.,,, after 20 years of work, if we haven’t made progress, but have instead retreated, it is time to cut bait.
uncommondescent.com/cosmology/cosmology-one-of-cosmic-inflation-theory%E2%80%99s-creators-now-questions-own-theory/

The 'big bang': More data and answers, but what about why? by John Horgan
Excerpt: Inflation, which was invented more than 25 years ago by the physicist Alan Guth, appealed to cosmologists because it seemed to solve various fine-tuning problems. Unfortunately, inflation comes in many different versions, and it is based on highly speculative physics that so far lack any empirical evidence. Paul Steinhardt, an early champion of inflation, now promotes a rival theory that he says can account for the observed universe just as well.
String theory suffers from flaws even deeper than those of inflation. Far from making our cosmos seem less arbitrary, string theory allows for more than a googol (1 followed by 100 zeros) different possible universes with dimensions, particles, forces and other properties radically unlike our own.
stevens.edu/csw/cgi-bin/blogs/scientific_curmudgeon/pages.php?p=inflation

The Inflation Debate - Paul J. Steinhardt - April 2011
Excerpt: Cosmic inflation is so widely accepted that it is often taken as established fact. The idea is that the geometry and uniformity of the cosmos were established during an intense early growth spurt.,,, But some of the theory’s creators, including the author, are having second thoughts. As the original theory has developed, cracks have appeared in its logical foundations.,,, Highly improbable conditions are required to start inflation. Worse, inflation goes on eternally, producing infinitely many outcomes, so the theory makes no firm observational predictions.
scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=the-inflation-summer

The Fine-Tuning of the Universe for Intelligent Life - Dr. Luke A. Barnes - December 2011 (Excellent multifaceted review of the fine-tuning 'problem')
Excerpt: We conclude that the universe is fine-tuned for the existence of life. Of all the ways that the laws of nature, constants of physics and initial conditions of the universe could have been, only a very small subset permits the existence of intelligent life.
uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/is-fine-tuning-a-fallacy/

Sean Carroll channels Giordano Bruno - Robert Sheldon - November 2011
Excerpt: 'In fact, on Lakatos' analysis, both String Theory and Inflation are clearly "degenerate science programs".'
2011/11/08/sean_carroll_channels_giordano_bruno.thtml" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">procrustes.blogtownhall.com/2011/11/08/sean_carroll_channels_giordano_bruno.thtml

Baron Münchhausen and the Self-Creating Universe:
Roger Penrose has calculated that the entropy of the big bang itself, in order to give rise to the life-permitting universe we observe, must be fine-tuned to one part in e10exp(123)≈10^10exp(123). Such complex specified conditions do not arise by chance, even in a string-theoretic multiverse with 10^500 different configurations of laws and constants, so an intelligent cause may be inferred. What is more, since it is the big bang itself that is fine-tuned to this degree, the intelligence that explains it as an effect must be logically prior to it and independent of it – in short, an immaterial intelligence that transcends matter, energy and space-time. (of note: 10^10^123 minus 10^500 is still, for all practical purposes, 10^10^123)
2007/06/baron_munchausen_and_the_selfc.html" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">evolutionnews.org/2007/06/baron_munchausen_and_the_selfc.html

String Theory Fails Another Test, the “Supertest” - December 2010
Excerpt: It looks like string theory has failed the “supertest”. If you believe that string theory “predicts” low-energy supersymmetry, this is a serious failure.
3338" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=3338

This Week’s Hype – November 3, 2011 by Peter Woit (Ph.D. in theoretical physics and a lecturer in mathematics at Columbia)
Excerpt: the LHC has turned out to be dud, producing no black holes or extra dimensions,
4118" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=4118

The Ultimate Guide to the Multiverse - Peter Woit - November 2011
Excerpt: The multiverse propaganda machine has now been going full-blast for more than eight years, since at least 2003 or so, and I’m beginning to wonder “what’s next?”. Once your ideas about theoretical physics reach the point of having a theory that says nothing at all, there’s no way to take this any farther. You can debate the “measure problem” endlessly in academic journals, but the cover stories about how you have revolutionized physics can only go on so long before they reach their natural end of shelf-life. This has gone on longer than I’d ever have guessed, but surely it has to end sooner or later, - Peter Woit - Senior Lecturer at Columbia University
4194" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=4194

'What is referred to as M-theory isn’t even a theory. It’s a collection of ideas, hopes, aspirations. It’s not even a theory and I think the book is a bit misleading in that respect. It gives you the impression that here is this new theory which is going to explain everything. It is nothing of the sort. It is not even a theory and certainly has no observational (evidence),,, I think the book suffers rather more strongly than many (other books). It’s not a uncommon thing in popular descriptions of science to latch onto some idea, particularly things to do with string theory, which have absolutely no support from observations.,,, They are very far from any kind of observational (testability). Yes, they (the ideas of M-theory) are hardly science." –
Roger Penrose – former close colleague of Stephen Hawking – in critique of Hawking’s new book ‘The Grand Design’,,, the exact quote is in the following video clip:

Roger Penrose Debunks Stephen Hawking's New Book 'The Grand Design' - video
5278793/" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">metacafe.com/watch/5278793/

BRUCE GORDON: Hawking's irrational arguments - October 2010
Excerpt: What is worse, multiplying without limit the opportunities for any event to happen in the context of a multiverse - where it is alleged that anything can spontaneously jump into existence without cause - produces a situation in which no absurdity is beyond the pale. For instance, we find multiverse cosmologists debating the "Boltzmann Brain" problem: In the most "reasonable" models for a multiverse, it is immeasurably more likely that our consciousness is associated with a brain that has spontaneously fluctuated into existence in the quantum vacuum than it is that we have parents and exist in an orderly universe with a 13.7 billion-year history. This is absurd. The multiverse hypothesis is therefore falsified because it renders false what we know to be true about ourselves. Clearly, embracing the multiverse idea entails a nihilistic irrationality that destroys the very possibility of science.
2010/oct/1/hawking-irrational-arguments/" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">washingtontimes.com/news/2010/oct/1/hawking-irrational-arguments/

Big Brain Theory: Have Cosmologists Lost Theirs? - January 2008
Excerpt: it’s hard for nature to make a whole universe. It’s much easier to make fragments of one, like planets, yourself maybe in a spacesuit or even — in the most absurd and troubling example — a naked brain floating in space.,, Alan Guth, a cosmologist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology,,, pointed out that some calculations result in an infinite number of free-floating brains for every normal brain, making it “infinitely unlikely for us to be normal brains.” Nature tends to do what is easiest, from the standpoint of energy and probability. And so these fragments — in particular the brains — would appear far more frequently than real full-fledged universes, or than us.,,
2008/01/15/science/15brain.html?_r=3&pagewanted=1&8dpc" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">nytimes.com/2008/01/15/science/15brain.html?_r=3&pagewanted=1&8dpc

Random Chaos vs. Uniformity Of Nature - Presuppositional Apologetics - video
6853139" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">metacafe.com/w/6853139

This is the materialists creed pointed out by Dr. Gordon:

‘We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs, in spite of its failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories, because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism. It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is an absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door. The eminent Kant scholar Lewis Beck used to say that anyone who could believe in God could believe in anything. To appeal to an omnipotent deity is to allow that at any moment the regularities of nature may be ruptured, that Miracles may happen.
Professor Richard Lewontin, a geneticist (and self-proclaimed Marxist)
creation.com/amazing-admission-lewontin-quote

And Dr. Gordon's astute observation in his last powerpoint is here:

The End Of Materialism?
* In the multiverse, anything can happen for no reason at all.
* In other words, the materialist is forced to believe in random miracles as a explanatory principle.
* In a Theistic universe, nothing happens without a reason. Miracles are therefore intelligently directed deviations from divinely maintained regularities, and are thus expressions of rational purpose.
* Scientific materialism is (therefore) epistemically self defeating: it makes scientific rationality impossible.

Jake: Math prodigy proud of his autism - 60 Minutes - CBS News - video
7395214n&tag=re1.channel" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=7395214n&tag=re1.channel

Quote of note at the 12:00 minute mark of the preceding video;
'The whole randomness thing, that's like completely against all of physics'
Jake Barnett - Math Prodigy

"Nonphysical formalism not only describes, but preceded physicality and the Big Bang
Formalism prescribed, organized and continues to govern physicodynamics."
2075-1729/2/1/106/ag" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">mdpi.com/2075-1729/2/1/106/ag

Is Life Unique? David L. Abel - January 2012
Concluding Statement: The scientific method itself cannot be reduced to mass and energy. Neither can language, translation, coding and decoding, mathematics, logic theory, programming, symbol systems, the integration of circuits, computation, categorizations, results tabulation, the drawing and discussion of conclusions. The prevailing Kuhnian paradigm rut of philosophic physicalism is obstructing scientific progress, biology in particular. There is more to life than chemistry. All known life is cybernetic. Control is choice-contingent and formal, not physicodynamic.
2075-1729/2/1/106/" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">mdpi.com/2075-1729/2/1/106/

Why Quantum Theory Does Not Support Materialism - By Bruce L Gordon:
Excerpt: Because quantum theory is thought to provide the bedrock for our scientific understanding of physical reality, it is to this theory that the materialist inevitably appeals in support of his worldview. But having fled to science in search of a safe haven for his doctrines, the materialist instead finds that quantum theory in fact dissolves and defeats his materialist understanding of the world.
2904125/k.E94E/Why_Quantum_Theory_Does_Not_Support_Materialism.htm" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">4truth.net/site/c.hiKXLbPNLrF/b.2904125/k.E94E/Why_Quantum_Theory_Does_Not_Support_Materialism.htm

additional notes not related to the video:

Quantum mind–body problem
Excerpt:Parallels between quantum mechanics and mind/body dualism were first drawn by the founders of quantum mechanics including Erwin Schrödinger, Werner Heisenberg, Wolfgang Pauli, Niels Bohr, and Eugene Wigner
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_mind%E2%80%93body_problem

Dr. Quantum - Double Slit Experiment & Entanglement - video
4096579" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">metacafe.com/watch/4096579

The Mental Universe - Richard Conn Henry - Professor of Physics John Hopkins University
Excerpt: The only reality is mind and observations, but observations are not of things. To see the Universe as it really is, we must abandon our tendency to conceptualize observations as things.,,, Physicists shy away from the truth because the truth is so alien to everyday physics. A common way to evade the mental universe is to invoke "decoherence" - the notion that "the physical environment" is sufficient to create reality, independent of the human mind. Yet the idea that any irreversible act of amplification is necessary to collapse the wave function is known to be wrong: in "Renninger-type" experiments, the wave function is collapsed simply by your human mind seeing nothing. The universe is entirely mental,,,, The Universe is immaterial — mental and spiritual. Live, and enjoy.
henry.pha.jhu.edu/The.mental.universe.pdf

Wheeler's Classic Delayed Choice Experiment:
Excerpt: Now, for many billions of years the photon is in transit in region 3. Yet we can choose (many billions of years later) which experimental set up to employ – the single wide-focus, or the two narrowly focused instruments. We have chosen whether to know which side of the galaxy the photon passed by (by choosing whether to use the two-telescope set up or not, which are the instruments that would give us the information about which side of the galaxy the photon passed). We have delayed this choice until a time long after the particles "have passed by one side of the galaxy, or the other side of the galaxy, or both sides of the galaxy," so to speak. Yet, it seems paradoxically that our later choice of whether to obtain this information determines which side of the galaxy the light passed, so to speak, billions of years ago. So it seems that time has nothing to do with effects of quantum mechanics. And, indeed, the original thought experiment was not based on any analysis of how particles evolve and behave over time – it was based on the mathematics. This is what the mathematics predicted for a result, and this is exactly the result obtained in the laboratory.
bottomlayer.com/bottom/basic_delayed_choice.htm

"It was not possible to formulate the laws (of quantum theory) in a fully consistent way without reference to consciousness."
Eugene Wigner (1902 -1995) from his collection of essays "Symmetries and Reflections – Scientific Essays"; Eugene Wigner laid the foundation for the theory of symmetries in quantum mechanics, for which he received the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1963.

"It will remain remarkable, in whatever way our future concepts may develop, that the very study of the external world led to the scientific conclusion that the content of the consciousness is the ultimate universal reality" -
Eugene Wigner - (Remarks on the Mind-Body Question, Eugene Wigner, in Wheeler and Zurek, p.169) - received Nobel Prize in 1963 for 'Quantum Symmetries'
informationphilosopher.com/solutions/scientists/wigner/

Here is the key experiment that led Wigner to his Nobel Prize winning work on quantum symmetries:

Eugene Wigner
Excerpt: To express this basic experience in a more direct way: the world does not have a privileged center, there is no absolute rest, preferred direction, unique origin of calendar time, even left and right seem to be rather symmetric. The interference of electrons, photons, neutrons has indicated that the state of a particle can be described by a vector possessing a certain number of components. As the observer is replaced by another observer (working elsewhere, looking at a different direction, using another clock, perhaps being left-handed), the state of the very same particle is described by another vector, obtained from the previous vector by multiplying it with a matrix. This matrix transfers from one observer to another.
reak.bme.hu/Wigner_Course/WignerBio/wb1.htm

i.e. In the experiment the 'world' (i.e. the universe) does not have a ‘privileged center’. Yet strangely, the conscious observer does exhibit a 'privileged center'. This is since the 'matrix', which determines which vector will be used to describe the particle in the experiment, is 'observer-centric' in its origination! Thus explaining Wigner’s dramatic statement, “It was not possible to formulate the laws (of quantum theory) in a fully consistent way without reference to consciousness.”

“I’m going to talk about the Bell inequality, and more importantly a new inequality that you might not have heard of called the Leggett inequality, that was recently measured, it was actually formulated almost 30 years ago by Professor Leggett, who is a Nobel Prize winner, but it wasn’t tested until about a year and a half ago (in 2007), when an article appeared in Nature, that the measurement was made by this prominent quantum group in Vienna led by Anton Zeilinger, which they measured the Leggett inequality, which actually goes a step deeper than the Bell inequality and rules out any possible interpretation other than consciousness creates reality when the measurement is made.” – Bernard Haisch, Ph.D., Calphysics Institute, is an astrophysicist and author of over 130 scientific publications.

Preceding quote taken from 3:50 minute mark of this following video;

Quantum Mechanics and Consciousness: A New Measurement 2/4
youtube.com/watch?v=Z31oGddiaCU

What drives materialists crazy is that consciousness cannot be seen, tasted, smelled, touched, heard, or studied in a laboratory. But how could it be otherwise? Consciousness is the very thing that is DOING the seeing, the tasting, the smelling, etc… We define material objects by their effect upon our senses – how they feel in our hands, how they appear to our eyes. But we know consciousness simply by BEING it!
411601" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">uncommondescent.com/neuroscience/another-atheist-checks-out-of-no-consciousnessno-free-will/comment-page-1/#comment-411601

The argument for God from consciousness can be framed like this:

1. Consciousness either preceded all of material reality or is a 'epi-phenomena' of material reality.
2. If consciousness is a 'epi-phenomena' of material reality then consciousness will be found to have no special position within material reality. Whereas conversely, if consciousness precedes material reality then consciousness will be found to have a special position within material reality.
3. Consciousness is found to have a special, even central, position within material reality.
4. Therefore, consciousness is found to precede material reality.

Epistemology – Why Should The Human Mind Even Be Able To Comprehend Reality? – Stephen Meyer - video – (Notes in description)
32145998">vimeo.com/32145998

Why should the human mind be able to comprehend reality so deeply? - referenced article
docs.google.com/document/d/1qGvbg_212biTtvMschSGZ_9kYSqhooRN4OUW_Pw-w0E/edit

Psalm 33:13-15
The LORD looks from heaven; He sees all the sons of men. From the place of His dwelling He looks on all the inhabitants of the earth; He fashions their hearts individually; He considers all their works.

Centrality of Each Individual Observer In The Universe and Christ’s Very Credible Reconciliation Of General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics
docs.google.com/document/d/17SDgYPHPcrl1XX39EXhaQzk7M0zmANKdYIetpZ-WB5Y/edit?hl=en_US

General Relativity, Quantum Mechanics, Entropy, and The Shroud Of Turin - updated video
34084462">vimeo.com/34084462

further notes:

Falsification Of Neo-Darwinism by Quantum Entanglement/Information
docs.google.com/document/d/1p8AQgqFqiRQwyaF8t1_CKTPQ9duN8FHU9-pV4oBDOVs/edit?hl=en_US

Intelligent Design - The Anthropic Hypothesis
2009/10/intelligent-design-anthropic-hypothesis_19.html" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">lettherebelight-77.blogspot.com/2009/10/intelligent-design-anthropic-hypothesis_19.html

Loading more stuff…

Hmm…it looks like things are taking a while to load. Try again?

Loading videos…